West Bengal

Uttar Dinajpur

EA/2/3

Laxmilala Sarma - Complainant(s)

Versus

B.S.N.L - Opp.Party(s)

29 May 2018

ORDER

Before the Honorable
Uttar Dinajpur Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Super Market Complex, Block 1 , 1st Floor.
 
Execution Application No. EA/2/3
( Date of Filing : 27 May 2002 )
In
CC/2/14
 
1. Laxmilala Sarma
S/o Late J SarmaVill, Kumardangi,PO Raiganj
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. B.S.N.L
RaiganjTelecom Dist, Karnoora, Raigan,
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Swapan Kr. Datta PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Tapan Kumar Bose MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
Dated : 29 May 2018
Final Order / Judgement

Today is fixed for hearing as to the petition dt. 25.01.18. The Jdr. filed a petition for amendment of execution petition.

 

According to the argument as advanced by Ld. Lawyer of the Dhr. is that the Jdr. did not comply with the order of the Ld. Forum from the date of judgement up to September 2016. The Jdr. complied the order of the Ld. Forum on the month of September 2017.In the petition for proposed amendment of the execution petition it has been mentioned that Dhr. is entitled to receive the compensation along with other benefit till December 20117 for which the petition for execution is required to be amended.

 

On the other hand the Ld. Lawyer of the Jdr. submits that the petition is not maintainable. There is no cause of action for filing the case. The Jdr. has complied the order and restore the telephone connection on 08.04.2012. So, no further compensation of Rs.300/- per day is applicable upon the Jdr. after that i.e. 08.04.2012. Jdr. has paid 18% interest of Rs.210/- to the Dhr. and Dhr. has accepted the same. So considering such facts and circumstances the prayer for further amendment is required to be rejected. The Ld. Lawyer of the Jdr. also submitted that the proposed amendment for execution petition is not maintainable at this stage.

 

Hd. both sides. 

 

From the petition of proposed amendment it is not clear that what amount is due and whether at all due or not. So the petition is quite misconceived and cannot be acted upon. In such circumstances the petition for proposed amendment is rejected. However, liberty is given to the Dhr. to file a fresh petition for execution the case clearly stating that he has received the amount so far and rest amount has not been paid by the Jdr., that amount was actually due. That petition is to be filed within two months from the date of order which will be treated as new execution case.

 

Inform both sides.

 

Thus the petition dt.25.01.2018 be disposed of and the execution case bearing No.03/2002 is also disposed of.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Swapan Kr. Datta]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Tapan Kumar Bose]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.